Gucci America Inc. v. Wang Huoqing In 2011, Gucci America, Inc. filed a complaint against Wang Huoqing, a resident of the People's Republic of China regarding the sale of counterfeit goods. To prove that Wang Huoqing was actually selling products incorrectly labeled as "Gucci," Gucci hired an investigator to buy products from Wang Huoqing's website. Once enough evidence was gathered to verify the accusations, Gucci filed a lawsuit against Wang Huoqing for trademark infringement with a California federal district court. As Wang Huoqing failed to appear in court, the court was warranted to issue a default judgment. Because Wang Huoqing was a resident of China, however, the court had to determine whether or not it had personal jurisdiction based …show more content…
This ruling is fair and just; the court provided a substantial amount of evidence proving both procedural and substantive unconscionable elements of the segment mandating arbitration. GeoEx's argument held that the defendant was in the wrong due to her (and her son's) failure to negotiate on the terms of the contract. As GeoEx also indicated that the terms were both unnegotiable and similar to the industry norm, it is clear that the clients were not presented with the option of negotiating other terms for the contract. Further, GeoEx ensured that the company would never be at a higher loss than the contracts in the event of a dispute; the arbitration was made to take place in California regardless of the resident of the clients and the maximum amount of compensation given to the clients was the exact amount of the cost of the trip itself. This amount does not cover the costs of traveling to appear for arbitration or the attorney fees that the clause mandates the clients to pay. This inequality of responsibility, restitution, and bargaining power is evidential of both procedural and substantive